Advocates of ever-higher Pentagon spending frequently argue that we must throw more money at the department to “support the troops.” But recent budget proposals and a new research paper issued by the Quincy Institute and the Costs of War Project at Brown University suggest otherwise.

 

The Pentagon spent $4 trillion over 5 years. Contractors got 54% of it.
Advocates of higher military spending often say its to 'support the troops.' Not exactly.

WILLIAM HARTUNG

JUL 10, 2025

 

The paper, which I co-authored with Stephen Semler, found that 54% of the Pentagon’s $4.4 trillion in discretionary spending from 2020 to 2024 went to military contractors. The top five alone — Lockheed Martin ($313 billion), RTX (formerly Raytheon, $145 billion), Boeing ($115 billion), General Dynamics ($116 billion), and Northrop Grumman ($81 billion) – received $771 billion in Pentagon contracts over that five year period.

This huge infusion of funds to arms makers comes at the expense of benefits for active duty personnel and veterans of America’s post-9/11 wars. Despite pay increases in recent years, there are still hundreds of thousands of military families who rely on food stamps, live in subpar housing, or suffer from other financial hardships.

Meanwhile, there are plans to cut tens of thousands of personnel at the Veterans Administration, close Veterans health centers, and even to reduce staffing at veteran suicide hotlines. And many of the programs veterans and their families depend on — from food stamps to Medicaid and more — are slated for sharp cuts in the budget bill signed by President Trump earlier this month.

It would be one thing if all of the hundreds of billions of dollars lavished on weapons contractors were being well spent in service of a better defense. But they are not. Overpriced and underperforming weapons systems like the F-35combat aircraft and the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) have shown themselves to be quite effective at consuming taxpayer dollars, even as the run huge cost overruns, suffer lengthy schedule delays, and, in the case of the F-35, are unavailable for use much of the time due to serious maintenance problems. 

The problems with the Sentinel and the F-35 are likely to pale in comparison with the sums that may be wasted in pursuit of President Trump’s proposal for a leak-proof “Golden Dome” missile defense system, a costly pipe dream that many experts feel is both physically impossible and strategically unwise. In the more than four decades and hundreds of billions of dollars spent since Ronald Reagan’s pledge to build an impenetrable shield against incoming ICBMs, the Pentagon has yet to succeed in a test conducted under realistic conditions, and has even failed in a large number of the carefully scripted efforts. 

And Golden Dome is more ambitious than Star Wars — it is supposed to intercept not just ICBMs, but hypersonic missiles, low-flying drones, and anything else that might be launched at the United States. 

The good news is that if you are a weapons contractor, whether from the Big Five or the emerging military tech sector in Silicon Valley, Golden Dome will be a gold mine, regardless of whether it ever produces a useful defense system.

The Silicon Valley crowd fully acknowledges the problems current industry leaders have had in producing effective weapons at an affordable price, and they have an answer — give the money to them instead, and they will produce nimble, affordable, easily replaceable, software driven weapons that will restore America to a position of global primacy. 

But the new guard is interested in much more than just building new products that they can sell to the Pentagon. The leaders of these emerging tech firms — led by Elon Musk at SpaceX, Peter Thiel at Palantir, and Palmer Luckey at Anduril — describe themselves as “founders” who will drag America from the doldrums to a position of unparalleled military dominance. 

And unlike the CEOs of the big contractors, these new-age militarists are vocally hawkish. Some, like Palmer Luckey, have publicly gloated about how we can beat China in a war that he sees coming in the next few years, while others, like Palantir CEO Alex Karp, have cheered on Israel’s campaign of mass slaughter in Gaza, even going so far as to hold the company’s board meeting in Israel at the height of the war as a gesture of solidarity.

Even after Elon Musk’s messy public breakup with Donald Trump, the tech sector still has a leg up over the old guard in influence over his administration. Vice President J.D. Vance was employed, mentored, and financed by Palantir’s Peter Thiel, and former employees of Anduril, Palantir, and other military tech firms have been appointed to influential positions in the national security bureaucracy. 

Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin and its cohort have a strong hand to play in Congress, where campaign contributions, hundreds of lobbyists, and suppliers located in a majority of states and districts give them immense power to keep their programs up and running, even in cases where the Pentagon and the military are trying to cancel or retire them.

Even at a proposed budget of $1 trillion a year, there may need to be some tradeoffs between legacy firms and new tech companies as the Pentagon chooses the next generation of weapons. The missing ingredient in all of this is the voice of the public, or strong input from members of Congress who care more about forging an effective defense strategy than they do about bringing Pentagon dollars to their areas. 

When it comes to creating a defense system appropriate to the world we live in, it shouldn’t be about Lockheed Martin versus Palantir, it should be about common sense versus special interest pleading. Technology alone will not save us, as we have seen from the repeated failures of “miracle weapons” like the electronic battlefield in Vietnam, or President Reagan’s Star Wars initiative, or the advent of precision-guided munitions to actually win wars or achieve favorable outcomes from Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan. 

Coming up with a defense plan that actually makes sense – and has any prospect of succeeding – will mean confronting the power and influence of the weapons contractors of all stripes, who now consume the bulk of the expenditures intended to promote the safety and security of America and its allies.

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/contractors-percentage-dod-spending/

 

==============

 

US aid to Ukraine laundered back to military-industrial complex – congressman
Republican representative Thomas Massie claims that the money being sent to Kiev ultimately ends up in the pockets of stockholders

The US Congress is continuing to vote in favor of sending billions of dollars to Ukraine because a lot of that money ends up being laundered back into the US military-industrial complex, Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie has said.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson on X (formerly Twitter) published on Wednesday, the politician was asked to explain why Washington continued to push for more funding for Ukraine despite it becoming obvious that Kiev’s forces “cannot win.”

Massie, who has repeatedly voted against funding Kiev’s military operations, alleged that a lot of the funds that are sent to Ukraine ultimately end up “enriching” people within specific US districts and “stockholders, some of whom are congressmen.”

“You know, people are getting rich, so let’s do it. It’s an immoral argument, but it is one. But that’s not the argument they’re making in public,” he said, noting that those supporting the funding of Ukraine with US tax dollars are instead arguing that it is a “moral obligation” to do so.

“You’re a bad person if you’re against this,” he complained, referring to a statement recently made by US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who suggested that failing to support “the fight for freedom in Ukraine” meant letting Russian President Vladimir Putin “prevail.”

“But no one mentions that we have abetted the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainian men that will not be replaced. To fight a war that they cannot win,” Massie noted.

In order to support the US government’s proposals on Ukraine aid, the congressman claimed, a person has to be “economically illiterate and morally deficient.”

https://www.rt.com/news/588617-us-ukraine-aid-congress/?ysclid=mei6wb56uc86156960

 

====================

 

AND NOW FOR SOME DETAILS (SINGLE SOURCE)....

 

Who Owns and Controls the Military-Industrial Complex?

The Highlands Forum EXPOSED

By Anonymous Patriots

March 31, 2016

 

The Millennium Report Exclusive:
The following exclusive report is quite lengthy and exhaustive.  There is no other series of disclosures about the Military-Industrial Complex on the Internet as revealing and radioactive.

The classified information and privileged data contained in this report are well worth downloading before they are disappeared forever from the World Wide Web.

There are two other very important exposés that ought to be read in tandem with this one. They, too, disclose much secret information about The Highlands Forum.  As follows:

GOOGLE: Conceived, Funded and Directed By The CIA — Part I

GOOGLE: Conceived, Funded and Directed By The CIA — Part II

The Millennium Report

 

We are not only incensed that our elected officials are turning a blind eye to the transnational enemy within our country and around the world, we are disgusted with these warlords, both military and corporate, that send our sons and daughters to wars-for-profit to have their blood spilled for their own families’ profits. As citizens of the world, we are filled with anger when we see men, women, and children slaughtered and displaced so that the few at the top can earn profits from blood and guns. We are sick and tired of wars ad nauseam, from our fathers who were killed in Viet Nam, our neighbors on 9-11, displaced war refugees around the world, not to mention the millions of starving children around the world who could use the money we spend on DARPA and their war tools for clean water, food, and education. 

This anger has arisen in us to the point that we had to find out WHO IS IN CHARGE. Unlike many of our politicians, we know that naming our enemy is the first step towards identifying and disarming them. 

Many readers to this site will be quite familiar with the usual suspects: the Rothchilds, Rockefellers, and big banksters who command the top tier of the human wealth pyramid. We also know that they work closely with government agencies to plan and implement continuing military, cyber, and economic wars.  We have all read about how the Bilderberg Club, Illuminati, and the Knights of Malta coordinate these machinations with the Vatican. We know that the U.S. Federal Reserve is just a private corporation with a monopoly to print Federal Reserve notes that manipulates and plunders the U.S and global economy. 

It is what we don’t know that interested us. So we decided to follow the money. Who are the war profiteers that are plundering American lives, wealth, and democracy?

In this article, the Anonymous Patriots are back again. Armed with the internet and a keen ability to interpret the geopolitical landscape, we have traced these GLOBAL WAR CRIMINALS back to the economic machinations that make them richer and more powerful with every military invention that they hoist on us. We are tired of becoming poorer, sicker, and more enslaved by these ruling sub-humans and ask you to arm yourselves with the knowledge we have gleaned from our research.

Then, be a patriot. Send this article to as many people as you can, as quickly as you can, so that the truth will be preserved when TPTB think about taking down this website.

Brief Background 

(We apologize that our articles are so long, but much needs to be said. You might want to cut and paste the article into a Word document so that it is easier to navigate and read.) 

To begin our journey, please review this list of the top ten or so military contractors, or Military Warlords.

Lockheed Martin Corporation, The Boeing Company, Raytheon Company, General Dynamics Corporation, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Leidos Holdings, Inc., Huntington Ingalls Industries, L-3 Communications Holdings Inc., United Technologies Corporation, BAE Systems PLC, SAIC, McKesson Corporation, Bechtel Group Inc., Veritas Capital Fund, Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation.

Now let’s look at the top shareholders of the top military contractors, who we call the Corporate or Bankster Warlords. 

Vanguard Group, State Street Corp, Capital Research Global Investors, Templeton Investment Counsel LLC, Barclays Bank Plc, BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd., Schroder Investment Management, Capital World Investors, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of New York Mellon Corp, Black Rock Advisors, Black Rock Fund Advisors, Old Republic International, Wellington Management Company, BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N. A., Evercore Trust Company, N. A., FMR, LLC, , Invesco Ltd., Franklin Resources, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.

What is worth noting about this list is that you can find some of the usual suspects: Rothchilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs, and the rest of the Bankster Warlords behind some of these names. These Americans are in the business of war, every type of war or conflict that enables them to sell their war products. Like any for-profit business they have products to sell and to make good profits they need a vibrant, robust customer base. “Peace-on-earth-goodwill-toward-men” is not a market that will purchase their war services and wares.    

To make things even more complex so that we can never figure out who is in charge, every one of these corporations owns major shares in every other corporation. They are intertwined like a grape vine. If we look closer we find that every one of these corporations conducts international business and is invested in international military ventures. They are not governed by any one nation as they transcend nations. 

This type of Corporate Warfare is transnational.  It is beyond being international or global. These companies work outside of the control of American as a nation. They work against Americans with their transnational economic warfare and make money from both sides of any military or corporate warfare. No matter who wins or loses, no matter how many of our children die in their war theaters, and no matter who the politicians are, they make money. And then they invest this money back into the same business because the business of war is extremely profitable.    

Essentially, they are war criminals just like Henry Schroder, who funded both Hitler and England.  This type of banking warfare is common throughout history.

Henry Schroder was a German banker who went to England to help start England’s central banking system. Blackwater, Templeton, and many of the other companies listed above are English and German who are all tied to the Bank of England in ways that no one can explain because the English Parliament is not allowed to question the Queen’s business. No one knows who owns the Bank of England or who the shareholders are. This should raise some eyebrows and make the conspiracy theorists ecstatic, and for good reason. It is fair to say that the lion’s share of war profits in America go to England. 

The Queen of England Makes Money from War

Accordingly, all the unsubstantiated conspiracies about the Queen of England have some merit after following the money back to the bankster warlords who set up the U.S. Federal Reserve. But unlike most conspiracy theories suggest, the Federal Reserve regional banks are not the true culprits. The true culprits are the original investors in the corporations, listed above, who serve the military through all types of wars – physical conflict, information, and economics. 

It is the interwoven fabric of the investments of the war-supporting corporations that have created a system that is inbred and tied to England…and then to Rome.  Simply through the association of the royal families of the world who are members of the Knights of Malta you have an economic intelligence community that is insider trading at a transnational level. The Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome, or DARPA are associations of powerful people with deep investments in military concerns who must protect their financial interests and pass wealth onto their family members. That is why so many of the richest families intermarry – to keep it “all in the family.”

The richest and most powerful people in the world belong to the Knights of Malta, the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, the Order of the Garter, the Teutonic Knights and many other orders that vow allegiance to the Vatican. If we wish to broaden the perspective, one can add that the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits, are involved at all levels and have worked tirelessly as the soldiers of the Pope to create the ultimate spy network. 

The Vatican Makes Money from War

All banking started in Italy and was connected to the Vatican.  It is fair to say that the central banking ideas of Italy have been replicated in the central banking systems used throughout the world. Central banking comes from the Vatican and through the different agencies of the Vatican (Knights of Malta) the world economy is manipulated by insider trading information that is being shared with the Vatican via the vows of allegiance that every Knight of Malta makes.

The Vatican profits by war because it takes in hundreds of billions a year through refugee placement services and humanitarian aid provided to war-torn areas. The more war – the richer the Vatican becomes. That is why the Vatican supports unbridled migrations of people and the chaos that ensues from war. The Knights of Malta are one of the largest charities in the world. The Catholic Church has thousands of different tax-free, charitable organizations that receive money to help in humanitarian causes. No one knows how much money the Catholic Church receives each year.  The Vatican Bank has been caught many times laundering money on a huge scale. 

Just like the almost unfathomable interwoven inbreeding of the bankster warlords, the double-speak of the Vatican is filled with lies. The Vatican says one thing and does the opposite. The Vatican itself gives no money away to any charity. The oldest and richest corporation in the world gives nothing to charity but is a “front” for the largest charity corporation on the planet. 

The Vatican also created Canon Law which developed into Common Law, Admiralty Law, and other forms of law. America attorneys still take an oath to the Temple Bar in the City of London. This is a reference to the Templar’s Headquarters in the City of London. The Templars were a Catholic order that more or less established banks from Europe to Jerusalem during the Crusades. Again, whether we look at the history of banking or law, all roads lead to Rome. Therefore, when we hear the theorists get all worked up about the conspiracies rampant in the military industrial complex, we should perhaps listen a little more carefully and do our own research to find that the simply version is supported by the detailed version.

But that still leaves the question of who “runs” the military industrial complex.

The Long War is Forever 

This question is actually quite simple to answer. Conspiracy theorists (yes, that’s us folks) will tell you that DARPA drives the engines of the military through farming out its “wish list” to private corporations to compete for the contract to build the desired technology. This is true. DARPA is well known for funding multiple initial projects and then further funding the winner. Often these “winners” create corporations that are given military contracts that pay the corporation to make the “war device” and the shareholders of the company glean the profits.  The Internet, Cisco Systems, Google, and Facebook are all inventions of DARPA. 

And we hardly have to mention the cost over-runs on every military contract. These contracts, paid for by American tax payers, are for hundreds of billions of dollars and the corporation is allowed and encouraged to make a big profit so the interwoven Corporate Warlords get their cut of the pie. When Rumsfeld audited the 7 trillion dollar Pentagon budget, 2.3 was missing. This is typical and still, to date, it hasn’t been “found.”

Even worse than the Corporate Warlord’s profits is the fact that every one of the top military contractors does business in international markets. This means that every military contract is, will be, or can be shared with other nations, including the very “enemies” for which the war-device is produced.  Transnational Corporate Warlords are selling the same “military secrets” to our enemies. Just read the web sites of any top military contractor where they proudly proclaim their international business in military devices. These transnational corporations are also using their influence to destabilize markets, economies, countries and currencies to create new business. Once DARPA gets the militarized version of the invention, the source code usually is made public. This may seem crazy, but it always feeds the enemy our new weapon designs so that they can keep up the appearance of a “weapons race.” 

Transnational corporations are dismantling America through political and military manipulation of the economy and the Corporate and Banking Warlords are having a party amidst the seeming chaos and confusion. These warlords know full well that the CIA manipulates currency as a continuing war. The International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the International Bank of Settlements advance the causes of these Corporate Warlords. Destabilizing countries creates the need for international intervention. 

The military industrial complex created the War on Terror and calls it the “long, soft war” because it will never end. The pronouncement of the War on Terror was the declaration of the overthrowing of American Democracy by warlord oligarchy. Only a few people benefit from this war and often the politicians who declare the “New World Order” take up positions in corporations that profit from war. Former presidents and prime ministers become Corporate Warlords and make a fortune. 

American Democracy is Doomed

If the following corporations continue to exist, American Democracy will fall and become the military arm of the triangle of power between New York, the City of London and Vatican City. These seeming vague indications will be elaborated on in the rest of this article but for now let’s review an outline of who owns and controls the military industrial complex.

“For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence – on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”       — John F. Kennedy, April 27, 1961

John Kennedy found out shortly after he spoke these words that the “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” was also at home in the United States. It was surely one of the causes of his assassination for in those days few knew of the treasonous behavior of Corporate and Banking Warlords. In our time, the greedy warlords are proud of what they do and the government supports them in full knowledge that transnationalism is destroying America.

Pentagon Missing Trillions

“The military’s money managers last year made almost $7 trillion in adjustments to their financial ledgers in an attempt to make them add up, the Pentagon’s inspector general said in a report released Frida.  The Pentagon could not show receipts for $2.3 trillion of those changes.                 Pentagon’s Finances in Disarray,
John M. Donnelly, 
                The Associated Press, 2001

This type of waste indicates the scale upon which the military industrial complex seemingly answers to no one.  No one checks whether DARPA inventions are moral. All military inventions, even if they advertise them as helpful, are weaponized. What DARPA releases is only the tip of the iceberg and is public. 

But there is a more secret group that directs the military in its future goals. One group, essentially one man, has been behind creating the direction of military and commercial warfare for decades. He founded the Highland Group which hosts forums for DARPA, Department of Defense, CIA, FBI, In-Q-Tel, Homeland Security, SAIC, and many other government agencies and organizations. 

All Highland Forums are private, invitation only, have no written agenda and basically are secret and did not happen. Except for the fact that the Corporate Warlords who are invited become privy to the direction of research for the US military, which subsequently creates the directions of Corporate Warlords. Nothing is written down so that no one is held responsible. The Highland Forums have been directing DARPA research and the research of the CIA’s research and development component called In-Q-Tel.

The Highland Forum, Richard Patrick O’Neill, and the Long War 

Let’s take a closer look at the Highland Forums. The description below is taken from their website:

Highland Forums Program Description Overview

“Information Warfare, Information Operations, Information Assurance, and Operational Resilience Information is an instrument of national, global, and corporate power. As such, control over its use, its protection, and its manipulation, are national and global security issues. This Research Program examines strategic and tactical offensive and defensive aspects of information operations (IO) by state and non-state actors to achieve political, military, and economic goals through IO means, including computer network operations (CNO), computer network attack (CNA), computer network exploitation (CNE), computer network defense (CND), psychological operations (PSYOPS), perception management, media manipulation, propaganda, strategic influence, and public diplomacy, among others.”

Richard Patrick O’Neill, the director of Highlands Group describes his work on their website as: “A core element of the Highlands Group activity has been the Highlands Forum. Over the past 18 years almost fifty major meetings and twenty enrichment sessions have been held around the country. Each succeeding session, small and cross-disciplinary in nature, brought remarkable people–from Nobel laureates and Pulitzer winners to young tech pioneers; from science fiction authors to corporate CEO’s; from scientists to military leaders–to link innovators from the “core and the edge”, without an outcome in mind, exploring a theme and a set of ideas, looking for novelty and emergence. The in-depth proceedings of those events are posted to the Secretary of Defense Highlands Forum website, along with interviews, original papers, and book reviews.” http://www.highlandsgroup.net/perspectives.php?ID=17 

One of the only descriptions found on the internet about a presentation at a Highlands Forum is given below to show the direction the group is taking to ensure that “war” continues universally.

The Web and the Long, “Soft” War, by Irving Wladawsky-Berger at http://blog.irvingwb.com/blog

“A few weeks ago I attended a very stimulating meeting, the Highlands Forum. The Forum is sponsored by the Office of the US Secretary of Defense to explore new ideas and emerging trends that will help support high-level Department of Defense (DoD) policy and strategy, especially as they relate to information and information technologies. 

The Highlands Forum was organized in 1994 by retired US Navy captain Dick O’Neill. It is chaired by the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration. Each meeting is centered on a specific topic. Around 25 experts from government, industry, academia, the arts and the professions are invited to discuss their ideas on the subject – to be part a kind of strategic conversation. 

While our discussions were generally technology-based, you cannot ponder how IT, the Web and related technologies could impact DoD without also thinking hard about the global environment that DoD, and society in general will face over the next decade and beyond. DoD’s primary task is “to deter conflict – but should deterrence fail, to fight and win the nation’s wars.” 

Then there is the War on Terror, which DoD has started to refer to as the Long War, a term that I first heard at the Forum. The Long War is perhaps as much about winning the hearts and minds of people and nations, as it is about defeating, or at least containing an enemy that is often hard to find. While one absolutely needs the weapons and military training to win the classic, hot conflicts, the soft or cultural aspects of the conflict are at least as important that over time could undermine democratic principles, free markets and our standard of living. 

It is a fact that the Internet, started by DoD for very legitimate defense purposes, has become the world’s platform for communication, information and innovation. Perhaps DoD should once again take on a lead role, this time in supporting research and pilot programs that will accelerate the development of some of the most complex and critical applications and emerging technologies that are driving the evolution of the Web for the very different requirements of the 21st Century. 

I would justify the investments as part of our efforts to prepare for and fight the Long War, as well as to help our armed forces become even more highly skilled, collaborative, information-based organizations. I think that a major part of the Long War is to get as many people and countries around the world to be part of and benefit from our increasingly interconnected economies. We need to help them see a potentially promising future for them and their families.

History of the CIA’s Version of DARPA – “In-Q-Tel”

“The lie can be maintained only for such time as the state can shield the people from political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the state to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the state.” Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels
Ministry of Enlightenment, Third Reich

The CIA has a legacy of operating at the cutting edge of science and technology with a reputation for bold innovation and risk taking, often working in advance of the private sector and other branches of government. 

By the late 1990s, the pace of commercial innovation had overtaken the ability of government agencies to develop and incorporate new technologies. The tech industry was innovating far too rapidly to ignore. Commercial technologies from the startup world addressed many of the same information technology, biotechnology, communications, and energy challenges that faced the intelligence community.

In 1998, CIA identified technology as a top strategic priority, and set out a bold and radical plan to create a new venture that would help increase the agency’s access to private sector innovation. In-Q-Tel was chartered in February 1999 by a group of private citizens at the request of the Director of Central Intelligence and with the support of the U.S. Congress. IQT was tasked with building a bridge between the IC and a new set of technology innovators.

The CIA’s – Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)

Leidos, a joint spin-off of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), is an American defense company headquartered in Reston, Virginia, that provides scientific, engineering, systems integration, and technical services. Leidos works extensively with the United States Department of Defense (4th largest DoD contractor FY2012), the United States Department of Homeland Security, and the United States Intelligence Community, including the National Security Agency, as well as other U.S. government civil agencies and selected commercial markets. On September 27, 2013, SAIC changed its name to Leidos and spun off a $4 billion government services and information technology company, which retains the name Science Applications International Corporation.

SAIC Projects

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) transitioned a Remote Viewing Program to SAIC in 1991 which was renamed the Stargate Project. The Stargate Project was the code name for a U.S. Army unit established in 1978 at Fort Meade, Maryland, by the Defense Intelligence Agency and SRI International (a California contractor) to investigate the potential for psychic phenomena in military and domestic applications. This primarily involved remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically “see” events, sites, or information from a great distance.

In March 2001 SAIC defined the concept for the NSA Trailblazer Project. Trailblazer was a continuation of the earlier ThinThread program which the United States National Security Agency (NSA) pursued during the 1990s. The program involved wiretapping and sophisticated analysis of the resulting data, but according to the article, the program was discontinued three weeks before the September 11, 2001 attacks due to the changes in priorities and the consolidation of U.S. intelligence authority.

The “change in priority” consisted of the decision made by the director of NSA General Michael V. Hayden to go with a concept called Trailblazer, despite the fact that ThinThread was a working prototype that claimed to protect the privacy of U.S. citizens. ThinThread was dismissed and replaced by the Trailblazer Project, which lacked the privacy protections. A consortium led by Science Applications International Corporation was awarded a $280 million contract to develop Trailblazer in 2002.

Trailblazer was a United States National Security Agency (NSA) program intended to develop a capability to analyze data carried on communications networks like the internet. It was intended to track entities using communication methods such as cell phones and e-mail. In 2002, NSA contracted SAIC for $280 million to produce a “technology demonstration platform” for the agency’s project, a “Digital Network Intelligence” system to analyze data carried on computer networks. 

In 1945 the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency was established and given direct responsibility for Operation Paperclip. The program recruited former Nazi scientists, some of whom had been identified and prosecuted as war during the Nuremberg Trials. Several secret U.S. government projects grew out of Operation Paperclip. These projects included Project CHATTER (established 1947), and Project BLUEBIRD (established 1950), which was renamed Project ARTICHOKE in 1951. Their purpose was to study mind control, interrogation, behavior modification and related topics.

MITRE

SAIC and Leidos (Solutions for National Security, Health, and Engineering) are for-profit companies that primarily work for various arms of the U.S. government. The MITRE Corporation is a Federally Funded Research and Development Company (FFRDC). MITRE is a private, not-for-profit corporation that operates FFRDCs – federally funded research and development centers. If you’ve ever flown in a jet or used GPS, you’ve benefited from technology with roots in an FFRDC. But despite the name, FFRDCs are about much more than R&D. These unique organizations serve as long-term strategic partners to the government, providing objective guidance in an environment free of conflicts of interest. They work with their government partners – also called sponsors – to assist with systems engineering and integration, research and development, and study and analysis.

For all intents and purposes, this makes MITRE a pseudo-government organization.  This is largely because the government is their only client.  In practice this means that meetings and decisions that are closed to contractors and consultants from other firms often have MITRE folks advising the government decision makers.  

Cyberspace – A New Operational Domain

In 2011, the United States (U.S.) Department of Defense (DOD) named cyberspace a new operational domain. The cyberspace domain provides critical capabilities that enable the U.S. Military to conduct operations in all domains (land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace). The U.S. Cyber Command and the Military Services are working to integrate the cyberspace domain with the other operational domains in order to conduct military command and control and achieve national security objectives. To effectively integrate cyberspace operations, DoD requires situational awareness of the Mission, Network, and Adversary based on analysis of operational data in order to make timely and effective decisions. 

Cyber Weapons are the New Arms for War

The military has for years been developing offensive capabilities, giving it the power not just to defend the U.S. but to assail its foes. Using so-called cyber-kinetic attacks, Alexander and his forces now have the capability to physically destroy an adversary’s equipment and infrastructure, and potentially even to kill. Alexander has concluded that such cyber weapons are as crucial to 21st-century warfare as nuclear arms were in the 20th. And he and his cyber warriors have already launched their first attack. The cyber-weapon that came to be known as Stuxnet was created and built by the NSA in partnership with the CIA and Israeli intelligence in the mid-2000s. The first known piece of malware designed to destroy physical equipment, Stuxnet was aimed at Iran’s nuclear facility in Natanz. By surreptitiously taking control of an industrial control link known as a Scada (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system, the sophisticated worm was able to damage about a thousand centrifuges used to enrich nuclear material.

But Stuxnet is only the beginning. Alexander’s agency has recruited thousands of computer experts, hackers, and engineering PhDs to expand U.S. offensive capabilities in the digital realm. The Pentagon has requested $4.7 billion for “cyberspace operations,” even as the budget of the CIA and other intelligence agencies could fall by $4.4 billion. It is pouring millions into cyber defense contractors. And more attacks may be planned.

On a remote stretch of desert in central Utah, the National Security Agency has built a massive, 1 million-square-foot data warehouse. Costing more than $1.5 billion, the highly secret facility is designed to house upward of trillions of intercepted phone calls, e-mail messages, internet searches and other communications intercepted by the agency as part of its expansive eavesdropping operations. The NSA is also completing work on another data warehouse, this one in San Antonio, Texas. 

“The essential element in the black art of obscurantism is not that it wants to darken individual understanding but that it wants to blacken our picture of the world, and darken our idea of existence.” Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human

A Description of Psyops from a Military Document

“Intelligence and Electronic Warfare Support to Psychological Operations” is based upon “Special Operations Forces Intelligence and Electronic Warfare Operations” Field Manual No. 34-36 published on 30 September 1991 by Department of the Army Headquarters in Washington DC.

Missions

PSYOP missions are planned products and psychological actions in peace or war that are directed toward foreign enemy, friendly, and neutral audiences. The purpose is to influence attitudes and behaviors to achieve national political and military objectives.

PSYOP supports varied military, political, and diplomatic actions across the operational continuum. These missions can be strategic, operational, or tactical missions.

Strategic PSYOP missions are conducted at the national or theater level to advance broad, long-term psychological objectives in support of national psychological objectives.

Operational PSYOP missions are conducted to achieve mid-term objectives in support of theater campaigns and major operations.

Tactical PSYOP missions are conducted to achieve immediate or short-term objectives in support of tactical military operations.

Any of the above categories of PSYOP may support more than one level of the operational continuum. That is why distinctions between the categories of PSYOP are often blurred.

Special operation forces (SOF), whether operating unilaterally or in cooperation with conventional forces across the entire operational continuum, must always consider non-military factors and objectives. 

PSYOP missions:

Play a critical and integral role in achieving or addressing these non-military objectives.

Aid in accomplishing tactical, operational, and strategic military objectives.

May be the only military force employed.

Must be integrated with all operations to prevent contradictory or conflicting messages.

Some Declassified In-Q-tel Projects

 “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

Edward Bernays, Propaganda

Recorded Future – Using what they call a “Temporal Analytics Engine,” Recorded Future (RF) provides forecasting and analysis tools to help analysts predict future events by scanning sources on the internet, and extracting, measuring, and visualizing the information to show networks and patterns in the past, present, and future. As of 2015 the engine was described as “Web Intelligence Engine Visible Technologies – social media monitoring.

Digital Reasoning – Since 2012, the firm has sold its Synthesys software to banks and hedge funds, including UBS and Point72 Asset Management. Financial institutions use Synthesys to scan internal e-mails within a given company in search of unfamiliar patterns between employees, in terms of word-specific content, frequency and interpersonal connections. The aim is to predict fraud before it occurs. 

Palantir – Palantir Technologies, Inc. is a private American software and services company, specializing in data analysis. The company is known for two software projects in particular: Palantir Gotham is used by counter-terrorism analysts at offices in the United States Intelligence Community and United States Department of Defense, fraud investigators at the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, and cyber analysts at Information Warfare Monitor.  

CallMiner – Phone speech analytics software

MASINT –  Remote tracking, surveillance, and extraction of brain-waves typifying thought-forms, emotional states, analytic mind states, and others

Mohomine mohoClassifier – Organizes mass data

3VR – 3VR Inc. develops software enabling organizations to mine data from video. 3VR works with leading banks, governments, law enforcement and retailers at the moment.

Adaptx – Creates digital pens that speed up field data collection.

Basis Technology – Synthesizes the foreign chatter and provides software for text analytics in over twenty languages. They work primarily in applied natural language processing, deriving meaning from the ways people actually use language. 

Cloudera – Large-scale data storage. Cloudera Enterprises is one of the most cost-effective ways for companies to securely carry out large-scale data analysis and storage. 

FireEye – FireEye is one of the most advanced cybersecurity firms and specializes in protecting against botnet attacks and also works to combat the malware that brings computers into the network. 

The Ember Corporation – Ember Corporation focuses on developing networking systems that simplify wirelessly networking low-power products. They’re focused on smart energy, remote monitoring, and remote control uses of their tech. 

Infinite Z – Virtual-holographic simulation a reality through an interactive 3D environment. 

OpenSpan – Makes software that enables organizations to see exactly what employees are doing on their computer: what programs they’re using, what progress they’re making, etc. 

Seventh Sense – Develops health monitoring products that interface with human skin

Sonitus Medical – Makes a hearing system that transmits sound imperceptibly through the mouth. The SoundBite hearing system plays off the principle of bone conduction to transmit audial messages. A nearly invisible in-the-mouth hearing and communication platform is non-invasive and connects directly to the inner ear, allowing the user to hear transmitted messages through their skull. 

Spotter RF – Makes super-powerful radars in a handheld form that can track a person walking anywhere within a 148 acre space, and it’s handheld. 

Visible Technologies – Extracts business solutions from social media chatter with software that allows users to extract business value from social communities, and also give customer insights for brands online. 

Walleye – Makes handheld devices that can see into and through solid objects

DARPA Applications

Social Media in Strategic Communication (SMISC) program is an attempt to get better at both detecting and conducting propaganda campaigns on social media. SMISC has two goals. First, the program needs to help the military better understand what’s going on in social media in real time – particularly in areas where troops are deployed. Second, Darpa wants SMISC to help the military play the social media propaganda game itself.

The Pentagon is building a tool to identify social media propaganda campaigns that produces counter-spin through computer artificial intelligence. 

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/pentagon-seeks-to-manipulate-social-media-for-propaganda-purposes.html

Interactive Facial Recognition in Real Time –BBC facial recognition programs help predict the success or failure of television programming. In the past, the BBC has used its facial recognition technology, built by in-house startup CrowdEmotion, to track 4,500 faces as people watched show trailers to see what kinds of emotions the commercials produced. They’ve also looked at how hundreds of study participants react to programs like Top Gear and Sherlock. http://fortune.com/2016/02/13/bbc-ads-crowdemotion/

The company CrowdSight uses facial recognition software in real time. They advertise on their website: “Understand and Predict your Audience! Deliver Better Experiences by Knowing their Emotional Behavior and Engagement in Real-time. CrowdSight Software Development Kit (SDK) is a flexible and easy-to-integrate Crowd Face Analysis Software which allows you to gather real-time, anonymous information about your audience while they behave spontaneously in different life environments. Understand your audience emotional reactions and engagement towards your products, content and campaigns, and recognize important demographics such as age, gender and ethnicity, in real-time. CrowdSight works offline and on the most popular desktop and mobile platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS, Android).”

http://sightcorp.com/crowdsight/

Visual Evoked Potential (VEP) – A VEP is an electrical potential recorded after a subject is presented with a type of visual stimuli. There are several types of VEPs.  Steady-state visually evoked potentials (SSVEPs) use potentials generated by exciting the retina, using visual stimuli modulated at certain frequencies. SSVEP’s stimuli are often formed from alternating checkerboard patterns and at times simply use flashing images. SSVEP has proved to be successful within many BCI systems. This is due to several factors, the signal elicited is measurable in as large a population as the transient VEP and blink movement and electro-cardiographic artefacts do not affect the frequencies monitored. 

Synthetic Telepathy and Silent Communication – In a $6.3 million Army initiative to invent devices for telepathic communication, Gerwin Schalk, underwritten in a $2.2 million grant, found that it is possible to use ECoG signals to discriminate the vowels and consonants embedded in spoken and in imagined words. The results shed light on the distinct mechanisms associated with production of vowels and consonants, and could provide the basis for brain-based communication using imagined speech. Research into synthetic telepathy using sub-vocalization is taking place at the University of California, Irvine under lead scientist Mike D’Zmura. 

The first such communication took place in the 1960s using EEG to create Morse code using brain alpha waves. Using EEG to communicate imagined speech is less accurate than the invasive method of placing an electrode between the skull and the brain. On February 27, 2013 the group of Miguel Nicolelis at Duke University and IINN-ELS successfully connected the brains of two rats with electronic interfaces that allowed them to directly share information, in the first-ever direct brain-to-brain interface. On 3 September 2014, scientists reported that direct communication between human brains was possible over extended distances through Internet transmission of EEG signals. 

Sentient World Simulation – The DoD is developing a parallel to Planet Earth, with billions of individual “nodes” to reflect every man, woman, and child this side of the dividing line between reality and AR. Called the Sentient World Simulation (SWS), it will be a “synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information”, according to a concept paper for the project.

“SWS provides an environment for testing Psychological Operations (PSYOP),” the paper reads, so that military leaders can “develop and test multiple courses of action to anticipate and shape behaviors of adversaries, neutrals, and partners.” SWS also replicates financial institutions, utilities, media outlets, and street corner shops. By applying theories of economics and human psychology, its developers believe they can predict how individuals and mobs will respond to various stressors.  http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/23/sentient_worlds/

Insight Program – DARPA awarded a $14 million contract to SAIC for the DARPA Insight program, which is intended to help U.S. intelligence experts detect threat networks, irregular warfare, and terrorist operations by combining intelligence information from imaging sensors, crowd-source and other social network or text-based sensors, as well as from other sources for further analysis. The program seeks to fill gaps in current U.S. intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems that center on the inability to exploit and cross-cue several different intelligence sources automatically.

The DARPA Insight program seeks to develop integrated human/machine reasoning into intelligence equipment to encompass operator knowledge and reasoning when dealing quickly with complex data from many different sensors. SAIC experts will concentrate on these areas in building the Insight next-generation ISR analysis system.

SAIC experts will build model-based behavioral correlation, modeling, prediction, and threat network analysis tools that combine intelligence information across many different sources automatically to improve the efficiencies of multi-intelligence sensors. The company also will develop a unified data-management and processing environment that integrates new intelligence sensors and software algorithms.

EM fields and Hidden symbols – DARPA is revealing programs, which have existed for years, to develop methods and techniques to incept thoughts and ideas into the mind. They reveal how once a mind has been programmed with the memory patterns, words and symbols can trigger the programing without the need of the original device.

Mind Control Project – The aim of this program is to remotely disrupt political dissent and extremism by employing “Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation” (TMS) in tandem with sophisticated propaganda based on this technology. TMS stimulates the temporal lobe of the brain with electromagnetic fields. The program, conducted by The Center for Strategic Communication, is based at Arizona State University. This research aims to literally induce or disrupt the operation of narratives within the brain. In other words, this research aims to stop individuals from thinking certain thoughts and make others believe things they normally would not believe. This research has tremendous interrogation possibilities and could potentially be used to more successfully spread propaganda or stop political upheaval to an unsuspecting public. This research is being conducted by The Center for Strategic Communication at ASU and is entitled “Toward Narrative Disruptors and Inductors: Mapping the Narrative Comprehension Network and its Persuasive Effects”. 

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation is a very powerful tool used to impair the brain functioning of individuals. See the videos below for a brief demonstration of the effects of TMS: 

http://youtu.be/XJtNPqCj-iA

http://youtu.be/FMR_T0mM7Pc

Once the research group determines which parts of the brain are associated with cognitive reasoning and narrative comprehension, they attempt to impair those sections in order to “create a fundamental basis for understanding how to disrupt or enhance aspects of narrative structure and/or brain functioning to minimize or maximize persuasive effects on subject proclivity to engage in political violence. 

Once it is determined that disruption of certain portions of the brain can enhance persuasive messaging, individuals can be persuaded to do things they normally would not do and believe things they normally would not believe. 

It offers the capability to induce or disrupt the operation of narratives in the brain, and develops the capability to induce narrative validity. 

Mechanical disruptions of narrative processing may be, ultimately, replicated through targeted strategic communication campaigns that approximate the narrative disruptions induced via magnetic stimulation. 

Through extensive research, they may be able to replicate the machine’s brain disrupting functioning simply through carefully crafted and researched persuasive messages and propaganda. With enough data, the government could spread propaganda through the media that people will almost automatically believe, whether it is true or not. 

In terms of interrogation possibilities, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation can be forced upon individuals to make them believe certain things, say certain things, and perhaps admit to acts they did not actually commit (as the TMS can induce narrative validity), or commit acts they normally would not commit.

The Brain Project – This area of study has received $100 million in funding via Obama’s ten-year BRAIN Project, as well as a $1.3 billion commitment from Europe. Concurrently, there is heavy military funding through agencies such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). This raises the question of transparency when a “black budget” often justifies total secrecy in the name of national security.

Neuroscientists Successfully Plant False Memories – MIT neuroscientists have shown that they can plant false memories. They also found that many of the neurological traces of these memories are identical in nature to those of authentic memories. Most of the research in this area currently revolves around how to induce and eliminate fear. The study also provides further evidence that memories are stored in networks of neurons that form memory traces for each experience we have.  Scientists already know how to set off an emotional response in combat veterans by simulating a specific set of frequencies that have become associated with wartime experience.

http://sitsshow.blogspot.com/2013/08/disclosure-darpa-reveals-mass-mind.html

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2011/05/darpa-chooses-saic.html

Total Information Awareness – Under the umbrella of a system known as Total Information Awareness, DARPA spearheaded many of the surveillance programs abused by the NSA. DARPA’s Total Information Awareness concept created a veritable buffet of advanced surveillance and data mining programs, many of which ultimately were folded into NSA’s PRISM. We now know that PRISM culled citizens’ personal data from companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, and was later leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden. 

Evidence Extraction and Link Discovery program (EELD) – Sole purpose is to gather as much information about both terror suspects and average American citizens as possible, using phone records, computer searches, credit card receipts, parking receipts, books checked out of the library, films rented, and more. Goal is to assess megadata on 285 million people a day in real-time.

Scalable Social Network Analysis (SSNA) – Program monitors telephone calls, conference calls, and ATM withdrawals … also sought to develop a far more invasive surveillance technology.

Activity Recognition and Monitoring (ARM) – With England’s CCTV surveillance cameras as a model, ARM created a massive database of people going about their everyday lives. Using advanced facial recognition software, the program highlighted any behavior that was outside the realm of a preprogrammed “ordinary,” the definition of which remains classified.

Deep Exploration and Filtering of Text (DEFT) – Operating on a 28 million dollar budget, this program utilizes advanced computer algorithms to analyze text-based messages in all shapes and forms, from text messages to reports, with the aim being to comprehend “implied and hidden meanings through probabilistic inference.” 

Nexus 7 – With a classified budget, this particularly program studies and tracks social network content. First used in Afghanistan in a defense capacity, when aimed at domestic networks the use of the program is a mystery.

Narrative Networks Program – Developed classified techniques used to manipulate trust in humans. For its Narrative Networks (N2) program, DARPA collaborated with a CIA agency called the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Agency (IARPA) to develop methods of overwriting messages in the human mind. The program was described as having two parts: first, to understand what happens in the human mind when someone sees or hears a message; second, to figure out how to control how the brain interprets the message.

Mind Control Devices from In-Q-Tel and DARPA

“The secrecy involved in the development of the electromagnetic mind-altering technology reflects the tremendous power that is inherent in it. To put it bluntly, whoever controls this technology can control the minds of men – all men.”      Nexus Magazine 1998

Real-time Contextual Overlays for Live Streams – A system and method for contextualizing and live-updating overlay data for live media streams.  Overlays can be generated in real-time and in response to live events.  US 20130311595 A1 November 21, 2013.  Google Inc. 

Method and Apparatus for Remotely Determining Emotional States – A waveform energy having a predetermined frequency and intensity is generated and wirelessly transmitted towards a subject.  Physiological or physical parameters of blood pressure, pulse rate, pupil size, respiration rate and perspiration level are measured for evaluating criminal intent in security sensitive areas.  US 5507291 A – April 5, 1994 

Sounds of Silence – The Silent Subliminal Presentation System (SSPS) – Silent Subliminal Presentation System was developed for commercial use in 1992. A silent communications system in which nonaural carriers, in the very low (ELF) or very high audio-frequency (VHF) range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency spectrum are amplitude – or frequency- modulated with the desired intelligence and  propagated acoustically or vibrationally, for inducement in to the brain, typically through the use of loudspeakers, earphones, or piezoelectric transducers. The modulated carriers may be transmitted directly in real time or may be recorded and stored on mechanical, magnetic, or optical media for delayed or repeated transmission to the listener. US Patent#5,159,703

Flame – The program is able to turn on a target’s Web cam and record video remotely and without detection.

Multidisciplinary Research Program of the University Research Initiative (MURI),  Recognize/predict social contexts, relationships, networks, and intentions from social media, taking into account non-verbal communication such as gestures, micro-expressions, posture, and latent semantics of text and speech. Create algorithms for prediction and collection of latent signals and their use in predicting social information.

Beware – Analyses people’s social media activity, property records, the records of friends, family or associates, among other data, to assign suspects a so-called “threat-score.” That “threat-score” can then be used by police to pre-judge if a suspect is going to be dangerous, and to adapt their approach accordingly.

Iraqi Silent Sound Program – US Psy-Ops teams set up FM transmitters, utilizing Iraqi frequencies and overpowered the local station. Along with patriotic and religious music, PsyOps transmitted “vague, confusing and contradictory military orders and information.”  A sophisticated electronic system designed to ‘speak’ directly to the mind of the listener; to alter and entrain his brainwaves, to manipulate his brain’s electroencephalographic (EEG) patterns and thus artificially implant negative emotional states – feelings of intense fear, anxiety, despair and hopelessness were created in the Iraqi troops. This effective subliminal system implants emotions in the minds of the targeted subject.

Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitors – US Patent and Trade Office, Patent #6,506,148 on subliminal behavior modification, 1/14/2003, United States Patent 6,506,148, Loos, January 14, 2003.  Abstract: It is possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be imbedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream. 

Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near 1/2 Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. 

For the latter, the image pulsing may be imbedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed effectively by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with subliminal intensity. Inventors: Loos; Hendricus G. (3019 Cresta Way, Laguna Beach, CA 92651), Appl. No.: 872528  Filed: June 1, 2001

Other Projects – Directed-energy weapons (DEWS), Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) weapons, Remote EEG Readers, Remote Electro-Muscular Shock/Incapacitation weapons, Remote Microwave weapons, Remote Voice to Skull weapons, Remote Neural Monitoring technologies, and EMF brain-wave monitoring, tracking, and harvesting technologies.

Google Created by CIA and Highlands Forum

One of the most interesting articles that highlights the way the DoD incubates war-technology is described in great detail by Nafeez Ahmed. This article shows that Google was funded throughout its inception by the CIA. Google was created as a weaponized war-tool as indicated by the many new inventions that DARPA and In-Q-Tel are focused on.

Nafeez Ahmed explains the Google-CIA connection in this excellent article:

http://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e#.nu1cd96l3

Essentially, the United States intelligence community funded, nurtured and incubated Google as part of a drive to dominate the world through control of information. Seed-funded by the NSA and CIA, Google was merely the first among a plethora of private sector start-ups co-opted by U.S. intelligence to retain ‘information superiority.’

The origins of this strategy trace back to a secret Pentagon-sponsored group that for the last two decades has functioned as a bridge between the U.S. government and elites across the business, industry, finance, corporate, and media sectors. The group has allowed some of the most powerful special interests in corporate America to systematically circumvent democratic accountability and the rule of law to influence government policies, as well as public opinion in the US and around the world. The results have been catastrophic: mass surveillance and perception management amidst a permanent state of global war. 

The U.S. intelligence community is implicated in nurturing the web platforms we know today, for the precise purpose of utilizing the technology as a mechanism to fight global ‘information war’ -  a war to legitimize the power of the few over the many. In reality, Google is a smokescreen behind which lurks the US military-industrial complex.

Highland Forum Dominates U.S. Defense Policy

In 1999, the CIA created its own venture capital investment firm, In-Q-Tel, to fund promising start-ups that might create technologies useful for intelligence agencies. But the inspiration for In-Q-Tel came earlier, when the Pentagon set up its own private sector outfit. Known as the ‘Highlands Forum,’ this private network has operated as a bridge between the Pentagon and powerful American elites outside the military since the mid-1990s. Despite changes in civilian administrations, the network around the Highlands Forum has become increasingly successful in dominating US defense policy.

As mentioned previously, SAIC stands for the U.S. defense firm, Science Applications International Corporation, which changed its name to Leidos in 2013, operating SAIC as a subsidiary. SAIC/Leidos is among the top 10 largest defense contractors in the US, and works closely with the U.S. intelligence community, especially the NSA. The agency is the company’s largest single customer and SAIC is the NSA’s largest contractor.

Richard Patrick O’Neill, founding president of the Pentagon’s Highlands Forum served his last post as deputy for strategy and policy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence, before setting up Highlands.

Since 1973, Andrew Marshall has headed up one of the Pentagon’s most powerful agencies, the Office of Net Assessment (ONA), the U.S. defense secretary’s internal ‘think tank’ which conducts highly classified research on future planning for defense policy across the US military and intelligence community. Marshall, now 93 years old and nicknamed “Yoda” by insiders, as “the DoD’s most elusive” but “one of its most influential” officials. Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz are  widely considered the hawks of the neoconservative movement in American politics –  were among Marshall’s star protégés.

The Highlands Forum’s influence on US defense policy has operated through three main channels: its sponsorship by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (around the middle of last decade this was transitioned specifically to the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, which is in charge of the main surveillance agencies); its direct link to Marshall’s ONA; and its direct link to DARPA.

The Highlands Forum has served as a two-way ‘influence bridge’: on the one hand, for the shadow network of private contractors to influence the formulation of information operations policy across U.S. military intelligence; and on the other, for the Pentagon to influence what is going on in the private sector. There is no clearer evidence of this than the instrumental role of the Forum in incubating the idea of mass surveillance as a mechanism to dominate information on a global scale.

In 1989, Richard O’Neill, then a U.S. Navy cryptologist, wrote a paper for the U.S. Naval War College, ‘Toward a methodology for perception management.’  O’Neill’s paper for the first time outlined a strategy for “perception management” as part of information warfare (IW). 

O’Neill’s proposed strategy identified three categories of targets for IW: adversaries – so they believe they are vulnerable; potential partners – so they perceive the cause as just; and civilian populations and political leadership – so they perceive the cost as worth the effort.

Around 1994, the Highlands Group was founded by O’Neill as an official Pentagon project at the appointment of Bill Clinton’s then defense secretary William Perry. In O’Neill’s own words, the group would function as the Pentagon’s ‘ideas lab.’ Total participants in the DoD’s Highlands Forum number over a thousand, although sessions largely consist of small closed workshop style gatherings of maximum 25–30 people, bringing together experts and officials depending on the subject. 

The Forum has inside access to the chiefs of the main U.S. surveillance and reconnaissance agencies, as well as the directors and their assistants at DoD research agencies, from DARPA, to the ONA and is deeply plugged into the Pentagon’s policy research task forces. In 2001, under the Total Information Awareness Program, President Bush had secretly authorized the NSA’s domestic surveillance of Americans without court-approved warrants. From then on, Highlands Forum partner SAIC played a key role in the NSA roll out from inception. SAIC was then among a consortium receiving a $280 million contract to develop one of the NSA’s secret eavesdropping systems. 

This was also the year that the Bush administration drew up its Information Operations Roadmap. Describing the internet as a “vulnerable weapons system,” Rumsfeld’s IO roadmap had advocated that Pentagon strategy “should be based on the premise that the Department [of Defense] will ‘fight the net’ as it would an enemy weapons system.” The U.S. should seek “maximum control” of the “full spectrum of globally emerging communications systems, sensors, and weapons systems,” advocated the document.

As of 2006, SAIC had been awarded a multi-million dollar NSA contract to develop a big data-mining project called ExecuteLocus, despite the colossal $1 billion failure of its preceding contract, known as ‘Trailblazer.’ Core components of TIA were being quietly continued under new code names.  The new surveillance program was then fully transitioned from DARPA’s jurisdiction to the NSA.

In addition to the CIA, In-Q-Tel (the CIA’s version of DARPA) has also been backed by the FBI, NGA, and Defense Intelligence Agency, among other agencies. 

O’Neill said his job as Forum president was to scope case studies from real companies across the private sector, like eBay and Human Genome Sciences, to figure out the basis of U.S. Information Superiority — how to dominate the information market — and leverage this for what the president and the secretary of defense wanted to do with regard to transformation of the DoD.

By 2007, Facebook received its second round of $12.7 million worth of funding from Accel Partners. Facebook’s 2008 round of funding was led by Greylock Venture Capital, which invested $27.5 million. Apart from Breyer and Zuckerberg, Facebook’s only other board member is Peter Thiel, co-founder of defense contractor Palantir which provides all sorts of data-mining and visualization technologies to U.S. government, military and intelligence agencies, including the NSA and FBI, and which itself was nurtured to financial viability by Highlands Forum members.

By 2008, the NSA was effectively resurrecting the TIA project with a focus on Internet data-mining via comprehensive monitoring of e-mail, text messages, and Web browsing. We also now know (thanks to Snowden) that the NSA’s XKeyscore ‘Digital Network Intelligence’ exploitation system was designed to allow analysts to search not just internet databases like emails, online chats and browsing history, but also telephone services, mobile phone audio, financial transactions and global air transport communications — essentially the entire global telecommunications grid. Highlands Forum partner SAIC played a key role, among other contractors, in producing and administering the NSA’s XKeyscore.

The investment firm responsible for creating the billion dollar fortunes of the tech sensations of the 21st century, from Google to Facebook, is intimately linked to the U.S. military intelligence community. The convergence of these powerful financial and military interests around the Highlands Forum, through George Lee’s sponsorship of the Forum’s new partner, the MIIS Cybersec initiative, is revealing in itself. MIIS Cybersec’s director, Dr, Itamara Lochard, has long been embedded in Highlands. 

Dr Itamara Lochard is a senior Highlands Forum member and Pentagon information operations expert. She directs the MIIS CyberSec initiative that now supports the Pentagon Highlands Forum with funding from Goldman Sachs partner George Lee, who led the valuations of Facebook and Google. Dr. Lochard maintains a comprehensive database of 1,700 non-state groups including insurgents, militias, terrorists, complex criminal organizations, organized gangs, malicious cyber actors and strategic non-violent actors, to analyze their organizational patterns, areas of cooperation, strategies and tactics. 

Her views disclose much about what the Highlands Forum has been advocating all these years. In 2004, Lochard was co-author of a study for the U.S. Air Force’s Institute for National Security Studies on US strategy toward ‘non-state armed groups.’ The study on the one hand argued that non-state armed groups should be urgently recognized as a ‘tier one security priority,’ and on the other that the proliferation of armed groups provide strategic opportunities that can be exploited to help achieve policy goals. There have and will be instances where the United States may find collaborating with armed group is in its strategic interests. But sophisticated tools must be developed to differentiate between different groups and understand their dynamics, to determine which groups should be countered, and which could be exploited for US interests. 

In 2009, it also emerged from a Google patent application that the company had deliberately been collecting ‘payload’ data from private wifi networks that would enable the identification of “geolocations.” In the same year, we now know, Google had signed an agreement with the NSA giving the agency open-ended access to the personal information of its users, and its hardware and software, in the name of cyber security. It is not just Google that is a key contributor and foundation of the US military-industrial complex: it is the entire internet, and the wide range of private sector companies — many nurtured and funded under the mantle of the U.S. intelligence community (or powerful financiers embedded in that community) — which sustain the internet and the telecoms infrastructure; it is also the myriad of start-ups selling cutting edge technologies to the CIA’s venture firm In-Q-Tel, where they can then be adapted and advanced for applications across the military intelligence community. 

Ultimately, the global surveillance apparatus and the classified tools used by agencies like the NSA to administer it, have been almost entirely made by external researchers and private contractors like Google, which operate outside the Pentagon.

In 2011, the Forum hosted two DARPA-funded scientists, Antonio and Hanna Damasio, who are principal investigators in the ‘Neurobiology of Narrative Framing’ project at the University of Southern California. Evoking Zalman’s emphasis on the need for Pentagon psychological operations to deploy “empathetic influence,” the new DARPA-backed project aims to investigate how narratives often appeal “to strong, sacred values in order to evoke an emotional response,” but in different ways across different cultures. The most disturbing element of the research is its focus on trying to understand how to increase the Pentagon’s capacity to deploy narratives that influence listeners in a way that overrides conventional reasoning in the context of morally questionable actions.

The research is based on extracting narratives from millions of American, Iranian and Chinese weblogs, and subjecting them to automated discourse analysis to compare them quantitatively across the three languages. The investigators then follow up using behavioral experiments with readers/listeners from different cultures to gauge their reaction different narratives “where each story makes an appeal to a sacred value to explain or justify a morally questionable behavior of the author.” Finally, the scientists apply neurobiological fMRI scanning to correlate the reactions and personal characteristics of subjects with their brain responses.

DARPA’s goal is to mine millions of American weblogs as part of its ‘neurobiology of narrative framing’ research. As the Pentagon’s extensive funding of propaganda on Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates, population influence and propaganda is critical not just in far-flung theatres abroad in strategic regions, but also at home, to quell the risk of domestic public opinion undermining the legitimacy of Pentagon policy. 

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, from 2008 to 2013, the five largest US defense contractors lost 14 percent of their employees, as the winding down of U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan led to lack of business and squeezed revenues. The continuation of the ‘Long War’ triggered by ISIS has, for now, reversed their fortunes. Companies profiting from the new war include many connected to the Highlands Forum, such as Leidos, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Boeing. War is profitable.

Yet in the long-run, the information imperialists have already failed. This investigation is based entirely on open source techniques, made viable largely in the context of the same information revolution that enabled Google. 

http://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e#.nu8se9bfx

US Military Uses PsyOps Weapons on Iraq

“PSYOPS seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives…. The feasibility had been established of projecting large, three-dimensional objects that appeared to float in the air. Washingtonpost.com has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue [this] very technology for PSYOPS application. The ‘Holographic Projector’ is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to ‘project information power from space … for special operations deception missions.'”

Washington Post article on PSYOPS, 2/1/1999

For those who don’t believe that the American military will use the “new weapons” created by DARPA and In-Q-Tel, we offer this article written about the use of electronic warfare on Iraqis that also affected our own soldiers.

Scalar Weapons Used in Iraq, Britain, Microwaving Iraq ‘Pacifying’ Rays Pose New Hazards In Iraq, by William Thomas (www.rense.com ) 

On the rooftop of a shrapnel-pocked building in the ruins of Fallujah, a team of GI’s stealthily sets up a gray plastic dome about two-feet in diameter. Keeping well back from the sight lines of the street and nearby buildings, they plug the cable connectors on the side of the “popper” into a power unit. The grunts have no clue what the device does. They are just following orders.

   “Most of the worker-bees that are placing these do not even know what is inside the “domes” just that they were told where to place them by Intel weenies with usually no nametag,” reports my source, a very well informed combat veteran I will call “Hank”.

   The grunts call the plastic devices “poppers” or “domes”. Once activated, each hidden transmitter emits a widening circle of invisible energy capable of passing through metal, concrete and human skulls up to half a mile away. “They are saturating the area with ULF, VLF and UHF freqs,” Hanks says, with equipment derived from US Navy undersea sonar and communications.

   But it’s not being used to locate and talk to submarines under Baghdad. After powering up the unit, the grunts quickly exit the area. It is their commanders, fervent hope that any male survivors enraged by brutal American bombardments that damaged virtually every building in this once thriving “City of Mosques”, displacing a quarter-million residents while murdering thousands of children, women and elders in their homes – will lose all incentive for further resistance and revenge.

   A dedicated former soldier, whose experiences during and after Desert Storm are chronicled in my book, Bringing The War Home, Hank stays in close touch with his unit serving “in theater” in Iraq. When I asked how many “poppers” are being used to irradiate Iraqi neighborhoods, he checked and got back to me. There are “at least 25 of these that have been deployed to theater, and used. Some have conked out and been removed, so I do not know how many are currently active and broadcasting.”

   Hank is concerned that innocent Iraqi families and unsuspecting GIs alike are being used as test subjects for a new generation of “psychotronic” weapons using invisible beams across the entire electromagnetic spectrum to selectively alter moods, behavior and bodily processes.

   “The “poppers, are capable of using a combo of ULF, VLF, UHF and EHF wavelengths in any combination at the same time, sometimes using one as a carrier wave for the others,” Hank explains, in a process called superheterodyning. The silent frequencies daily sweeping Fallujah and other trouble spots are the same Navy “freqs that drove whales nuts and made them go astray onto beaches.”

Microwaving Iraq

The Gulf War veteran observes that occupied Iraq has become a “saturation environment” of electromagnetic radiation. Potentially lethal electromagnetic smog from high-power US military electronics and experimental beam weapons is placing already hard-hit local populations-particularly children — at even higher risk of experiencing serious illness, suicidal depression, impaired cognitive ability, even death.

   American troops constantly exposed “up close” to their own microwave transmitters, battlefield radars and RF weapons are also seeing their health eroded by electromagnetic sickness. It’s common, Hank recalls, for GIs to warm themselves on cold desert nights by basking in the microwaves radiating from their QUEEMS communications and RATT radar rigs.

   Constant microwave emissions from ground-sweeping RATT rigs and SINGARS mobile microwave networks are much more powerful than civilian microwave cell phone nets linked in many clinical studies to maladies ranging from asthma, cataracts, headaches, memory loss, early Alzheimer’s, bad dreams and cancer.

   Clinical tests have repeatedly shown how microwaves “rev up” incipient cancer cells several hundred times. Triggered by nuclear radiation, and turned rogue by electromagnetic warfare unleashed by US forces, human cancer cells have been found to continue proliferating wildly — even after the power source is turned off

Microwaving Wombs at Greenham Common

Another harrowing example involves the sudden illness and cancer deaths of US embassy staff in Moscow after being deliberately targeted with very weak pulsed microwaves by Soviet experimenters and fascinated CIA onlookers running “Project Phoenix” in 1962.

   Very Low Frequency (VLF) weapons include the dozens of “poppers” currently deployed in Iraq, which can be dialed to or “long wave” frequencies capable of traveling great distances through the ground or intervening structures. As air force Lt Col. Peter L. Hays, Director of the Institute for National Security Studies reveals, “transmission of long wavelength sound creates biophysical effects; nausea, loss of bowels, disorientation, vomiting, potential internal organ damage or death may occur.”

GI’s “Driven Nuts” by Electromagnetics in Iraq

Like so many other American blunders among the ruins of Babylon, the intended microwave “pacification” of rebellious neighborhoods is having unintended effects. In actual “field-testing” in the Sunni Triangle, Hank has learned that the hidden, dome-shaped devices “are removing inhibitions”. Armed individuals, already highly motivated to kill American forces are reportedly “losing all restraint” when exposed to the electromagnetic beams.

   According to Hank’s buddies in Baghdad, the frequency-shifting “poppers” “are having some remarkable effects on the locals as well as our own people.” But these effects differ. Possibly, Hank surmises, because Americans come from daily domestic and military environments saturated with electromagnetic frequencies, while many Iraqis still live without reliable electricity in places largely free from electromagnetics before the American invasion.

   According to members of Hank’s former unit, constant exposure to invisible emissions from radar and radio rigs — as well as to their own microwave weapons — is backfiring. “Our people are driven nuts,” Hank says. “It makes them stupid for two or three days.”

  The Desert Storm veteran compared the emotional effects of constant exposure to military microwaves to a lingering low-pressure weather system that never goes away. “You feel way down for days at a time,” he emphasizes

   As a consequence, AWOL rates among “spaced out” US troops are as high as 15%, Hank reports. For many deserters, it is not cowardice or conscience that is causing them to absent themselves from duty. “They are feeling so depressed,” Hank explains. “They don’t feel good. So they leave.”

   According to Hank’s front-line buddies, Iraqis exposed to secret beam weapons “get laid back, confused and mellow, and then blast out in a rage, as opposed to our folks going on what could only be called a “bender” and turning into a mean drunk for a while.”

   Once they wander away from direct electromagnetic-fire, startled GIs come to their senses. They return to their units, Hank explains, saying, “What was I thinking?”

   The recovery rate among US troops “seems to be about a day or so, where the locals are not getting over it in less than a week or more on average,” Hank has learned.

   It is Hank’s hope that his revelations will prompt public debate over the secret use of electromagnetic weapons in Iraq. But lost in the arguments over these supposedly “non-lethal” weapons is a much bigger question: What are Americans doing there?

   Whether soldier or civilian at home, it is our imperative duty to stop supporting those responsible for ongoing “weapons tests” in Iraq. As electrochemical “beings of light,” the strongest electromagnetic force on Earth is human conscience, acted upon.

http://www.rense.com/general62/mciro.htm

Where Do We Go From Here?

Now that we have the answer to the original question: Who owns and controls the military industrial complex, we need to ask another question. 

Who are these Corporate and Banking Warlords in a war with?

Unfortunately, it is very clear that Americans are the target of the long, soft war of terrorism.  Each American is a potential terrorist or at least a possible dissenter who doesn’t support the current administration’s policies. Hundreds of war-tools have lined the pockets of the Corporate and Banking Warlords while the military puts civilians in the cross-hairs. American Democracy has been taken over by transnational greed and power. 

We pay taxes so that the DoD can create war-tools that are used against US, the citizens of the U.S. 

These realities are a basis for declaring a patriotic war on the following transnational corporations and agencies that have already declared war on American citizens. The following list represents some of the people who need to be investigated and brought to justice:

The Department of Defense

The National Security Agency

DARPA

In-Q-Tel

Highlands Group and all attendees of Highlands Forums

The Federal Reserve

The Counsels on Foreign Relations

The International Monetary Fund

The World Bank

The International Court of Settlements

All Transnational Corporations and Banks

The Bank of England

The Vatican Bank

The Knights of Malta

Any of these corporations found guilty should be held responsible for the crimes and banned from further business in the United States of America; their principals should be tried for the crimes that have perpetrated, whether it is treason, crimes against humanity, insider trading, or murder.

There is an internal war going on in America. But with the military use of the war-tools described above, perception management is controlled and no one even asks how the president and the Department of Defense are able to wage this war. In a previous article, False Flags are Legal Propaganda, we spelled out in great details the way the National Defense Authorization Act has been modified each year to empower this war against Americans. 

https://themillenniumreport.com/2016/01/false-flags-are-legal-propaganda-produced-by-the-department-of-defense/

 

===========================

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

 

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIEDo3j77-s

 

SEE ALSO:

Who Received More Military Donations for the Campaign?

Analyzing campaign finance data to definitively state who received “more” military donations is complex due to varying definitions of what constitutes a “military donation,” data limitations, and the constant fluctuation of campaign finance figures. However, historically and consistently, Republican candidates, particularly those running for President and Congress, have received a larger proportion of campaign contributions linked to the defense industry and individuals affiliated with the military compared to their Democratic counterparts. This disparity is a long-standing trend often attributed to differences in party platforms, voting records on military spending, and perceived alignment with national security interests.

Understanding Military Donations

Defining a “military donation” involves several considerations. It’s not simply about individuals currently serving in the military donating. Instead, it encompasses contributions from:

 

• Employees of defense contractors: Individuals working for companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman.
• Executives and shareholders of defense companies: High-level personnel with significant financial stakes in the defense industry.
• Lobbyists for defense contractors: Individuals paid to represent the interests of defense companies to policymakers.
• Retired military officers and personnel: While no longer actively serving, their background and potential influence make their contributions relevant.
• Political Action Committees (PACs) associated with defense companies and military advocacy groups: These PACs aggregate contributions from various sources and donate to candidates.

It’s crucial to note that these contributions are often legal and represent individuals and organizations exercising their right to participate in the political process. The implication of these donations on policy decisions, however, is a subject of continuous debate.

Historical Trends and Data Analysis

Analyzing data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and organizations like the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org) reveals a consistent pattern. Republican candidates generally benefit from larger contributions from the defense sector. This doesn’t necessarily mean all Republicans receive more than all Democrats, but the overall trend consistently points in that direction.

Several factors contribute to this trend:

• Party Platforms: The Republican Party platform typically emphasizes a strong national defense and increased military spending, which aligns with the interests of the defense industry.
• Voting Records: Republican members of Congress often vote in favor of defense appropriations bills and policies that benefit defense contractors.
• Ideological Alignment: A perception exists that Republicans are more supportive of the military and its mission, attracting donations from individuals and organizations within that sphere.
• Access and Influence: Contributions can provide access to policymakers, allowing defense companies to advocate for their interests and influence policy decisions.

While precise figures vary from election cycle to election cycle, the general trend of Republicans receiving a larger share of military-related donations remains consistent. This trend can be observed in Presidential races, Congressional elections, and even some state-level campaigns. However, it’s crucial to avoid generalizations. Some Democrats also receive significant contributions, particularly those serving on key committees related to defense and national security.

The Impact of Military Donations

The impact of military donations on policy is a complex and debated topic. Critics argue that these contributions can lead to:

• Increased Military Spending: Politicians who receive significant contributions from the defense industry may be more inclined to support higher levels of military spending, even if those levels are not justified by national security needs.
• Prioritization of Defense Interests: Policy decisions may be skewed to favor the interests of defense contractors over other priorities, such as education, healthcare, or infrastructure.
• Lack of Oversight: Policymakers may be less likely to scrutinize defense spending and hold contractors accountable for cost overruns and performance issues.

Proponents argue that these contributions are simply a form of political participation and that defense companies have a legitimate right to advocate for their interests. They also contend that military spending is essential for national security and that supporting the defense industry is a patriotic duty.

The Role of PACs

Political Action Committees (PACs) play a significant role in channeling campaign contributions from the defense industry. These PACs aggregate donations from employees, executives, and other stakeholders and then contribute to candidates who are deemed supportive of their interests.

The amount of money that PACs can contribute to individual candidates is limited by law, but they can still have a significant impact, especially in close races. PACs also engage in independent expenditures, such as running ads supporting or opposing candidates, which are not subject to contribution limits.

Transparency and Disclosure

Campaign finance laws require disclosure of campaign contributions, which allows the public to track who is donating to which candidates. However, there are limitations to this transparency.

• Dark Money: Some contributions are made through “dark money” groups, which are not required to disclose their donors. This makes it difficult to track the true source of these funds.
• Loopholes: Some campaign finance laws have loopholes that allow donors to circumvent contribution limits and disclosure requirements.

Improving transparency and disclosure in campaign finance is a key goal of many reform advocates.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is considered a “military donation” for campaign finance purposes?

A military donation typically refers to campaign contributions from employees, executives, shareholders, and lobbyists of defense contractors, retired military officers, and PACs associated with defense companies and military advocacy groups. It’s any donation that can be reasonably linked to the defense industry or individuals closely associated with the military.

2. Does the party in power always receive more military donations?

Not necessarily. While the party in power might benefit from increased attention and lobbying efforts, historical data suggests that Republican candidates generally receive a larger proportion of military-related donations regardless of whether they hold the presidency or control Congress.

3. Are there legal limits on how much defense companies can donate to campaigns?

Yes, there are legal limits on how much individuals and PACs can contribute to campaigns. These limits are set by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and vary depending on the type of election and the nature of the contributor (individual vs. PAC).

4. Do individual military members donate significantly to political campaigns?

While individual military members donate to campaigns, their overall contribution to campaign finance is typically smaller compared to donations from defense industry employees and PACs. However, their contributions are often motivated by strong beliefs and a desire to support candidates who share their values.

5. How can I find out who is donating to a specific campaign?

You can access campaign finance data through the Federal Election Commission (FEC) website and organizations like the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org). These resources provide detailed information on campaign contributions, including donor names, addresses, and donation amounts.

6. Does accepting military donations automatically mean a politician is pro-war?

No. Accepting donations doesn’t automatically dictate a politician’s stance on war or peace. Many factors influence policy decisions, including constituent concerns, national security assessments, and personal beliefs. However, campaign contributions can create potential conflicts of interest.

7. Do Democrats ever receive substantial donations from the defense industry?

Yes, some Democrats receive substantial donations, especially those serving on key committees related to defense and national security. These contributions are often strategic and based on the candidate’s perceived influence on defense policy.

8. How do “dark money” contributions impact the accuracy of campaign finance data?

“Dark money” contributions, which are made through organizations that do not disclose their donors, make it difficult to track the true source of funds and can distort the accuracy of campaign finance data. This lack of transparency raises concerns about undue influence and accountability.

9. What are the potential consequences of politicians being heavily reliant on military donations?

Potential consequences include increased military spending, prioritization of defense interests over other priorities, and a lack of oversight of defense contractors. Critics argue that this can lead to inefficient and wasteful spending and undermine public trust in government.

10. How do campaign finance laws in other countries compare to the US in terms of military donations?

Campaign finance laws vary significantly across countries. Some countries have stricter regulations on corporate and industry donations, while others have more lenient rules. A detailed comparison would require a country-by-country analysis.

11. Are there any efforts to reform campaign finance laws related to military donations?

Yes, various reform efforts aim to limit the influence of money in politics, including proposals to ban or restrict corporate and PAC donations, increase transparency and disclosure requirements, and establish public financing of elections.

12. How has the trend of military donations changed over time?

The trend of Republican candidates receiving a larger proportion of military-related donations has been consistent for several decades. However, the specific amounts and the distribution of donations can fluctuate from election cycle to election cycle depending on the political climate and the candidates involved.

13. What role do lobbyists play in influencing campaign donations and policy decisions?

Lobbyists play a crucial role in influencing campaign donations and policy decisions. They represent the interests of defense companies and other organizations, and they work to persuade policymakers to support their positions. Lobbyists often cultivate relationships with policymakers, provide them with information, and contribute to their campaigns.

14. How can voters make informed decisions about campaign finance and political influence?

Voters can make informed decisions by researching campaign finance data, reading news articles and investigative reports, and supporting organizations that advocate for campaign finance reform. It’s also important to critically evaluate the information they receive and consider the source’s biases.

15. What are some ethical considerations for politicians who receive military donations?

Politicians who receive military donations should be mindful of potential conflicts of interest and ensure that their policy decisions are based on the best interests of their constituents and the nation, not on the financial interests of their donors. They should also be transparent about their campaign finance and be willing to engage in open and honest discussions about the role of money in politics.